Medical staff constitute an important cohort exposed to artificial occupational ionizing radiation. This study aimed to analyze the trends in radiation exposure among medical workers from 2008 to 2024, identify potential risk factors, and compare occupational ionizing radiation exposure levels for medical workers before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Retrospective quantitative trend analyses were performed under different conditions, and multivariate logistic regression was utilized to assess potential risk factors associated with radiation exposure. The Kruskal-Wallis H test and one-way ANOVA test were applied to compare radiation exposure doses across subgroups before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Basic information analyses indicated that being male, aged 40–50 years, possession of a doctoral degree, working in interventional medicine, and holding the profession of doctor were independent risk factors for average annual exposure doses among the entire population, which was different from those in nonzero exposure group and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Trend analyses revealed that most subgroups experienced insignificant changes in exposure doses, regardless of whether they belonged to the entire population or the nonzero exposure group. Further comparisons showed that the average exposure doses of most workers significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, these doses significantly declined following the lifting of lockdown measures. Our results might be served as a valuable reference for sustainable developments in the future. Most critically, despite the fact that the majority of annual doses remain below the limits established by the International Commission on Radiological Protection and the relevant national standards implemented in China, heightened attention ought to be accorded to occupational ionizing radiation exposure among medical workers during pandemics like COVID − 19. No trial registration was required for this observational study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: